*Sunflower

Sneaky Feelings


Now everybody's breakin' up somebody else's home, (I didn't know she still felt for you)
before somebody else starts breaking up their own. (I didn't think you still felt for her)
I get you in my dreams.
You should hear the things you say. (I always thought this was "you should do the things you see." Oh you should.)
It's not that it's so much fun,
but it's safer that way. (safer... safer if you don't know.)

Sneaky feelings, sneaky feelings,
you can't let those kind of feelings show. (not before and not anymore)
I'd like to get right through the way I feel for you, (no I don't but I do but I don't)
but I've still got a long way to go. (a long long way)

Why don't we call it a day, and we can both confess.
You can force me to use a little tenderness.
White lies, alibis, anything but say that it's true.
Now we could sit like lovers, staring in each other's eyes, (it was amazing)
but the magic of the moment might become too much for you. (*groan* and it was pure joy)

Sneaky feelings, sneaky feelings,
you can't let those kind of feelings show.
I'd like to get right through the way I feel for you,
But I've still got a long way to go.

I wanted you for so long. Now I know, and that makes it so much harder. So much harder to be patient.
*Sunflower

Dead week finals week blah

Everyone's posting about finals so I suppose I will follow suit.

My set of finals is actually extremely low stress:

Two days ago: a 1-2 page reflection on my ballroom dance class. Less than an MLC portfolio piece, but hey it's a 1-credit pass/no-pass PE class.

Today: I have my lab practical, which I've actually been looking hella forward to because we basically get unknown chemicals and then play with them until we figure out what they are. Then my about-5-pages final paper is due for Women's Studies. My paper is only 4 pages but I think it is well-written, and maybe I'll think of some more stuff add today before section.

Next week: Traditional exams for chemistry and math on Wednesday and Thursday. I do well on exams, and I'm already getting A's in those classes so I'll just do a little refresher studying, but next week I'm mostly going to focus on moving out of my room since I have to go back to Portland Thursday afternoon.
*Sunflower

A meme

If you saw me in the back of a police car, what would you think I was arrested for?

Answer me, then post this in your own journal to see how many different crimes you get accused of committing.

I hope my friends are not too lazy/don't check their LJs anymore to answer this.
*Sunflower

Jesus smokes weeeed...

Not really. Not being Christian, having read the Bible, or being versed in religious history, I have no basis to judge whether Jesus would have used drugs or not and I really actually don't care. But, through a complicated series of links I came to a page (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_Jesus_use_drugs) with points discussing the issue, and I just wanted to blow some massive holes in this person's argument:

"Several other scriptures tell us that Jesus body was uncorrupted. (Acts 2:27, Acts 13:35, Psalms 16:10) Medical research has proven that illicit drugs corrupt the body by ruining our health. So, Jesus uncorrupted body would not have been exposed to such substances.

Some today may assert that the fact that Jesus consumed wine, shows that he may have used drugs. Some want to equate wine and other alcoholic beverages with drugs. That is a stretch to say the least. The fact is, that the body does not treat alcohol and drugs the same. In moderation, alcohol is consumed, digested by the body. It turns to sugar in the body, and is treated as food. Drugs, such as THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, are toxins that the body has no use for."

1a. Distinguishing certain drugs as illicit is completely irrelevant. We're talking about two thousand years ago - they didn't have the same legal codes we do now, and your body doesn't care what's legal and what's not anyway.
1b. Not all drugs ruin your health, whether a given drug does or not has nothing to do with its legal status, and many drugs vary in their health impact based on delivery method. This entire paragraph just makes blatant the bias of the person writing it.

2a. Equating alcohol and drugs isn't a stretch at all; alcohol IS a drug. Pharmacologically, this is indisputable. This paragraph, in case you hadn't guessed, displays the person's ignorance...
2b. Alcohol does not turn into sugar in the body; that's chemical nonsense. Alcohols are based on carbon chains; sugars are based on rings. It turns into acetaldehyde. Alcohol can't be converted into fat either, unlike carbohydrates. It has calories, but that's about the only thing that makes it like food apart from the method of consumption.
2c. If the body had no use for drugs, they wouldn't have an effect and therefore wouldn't be drugs. Furthermore, calling THC a toxin is silly, and downright absurd in a comparison with alcohol. It's pretty easy to poison yourself with alcohol, but there's never been a legitimate documented case of THC overdose. You'd die of smoke inhalation (or gastric rupture) first.
*Sunflower

I have a more serious blog

I have a more serious and audience-aware blog, which I aim to keep updated fairly regularly. Scroll down to the first post to find an explanation of its purpose and intent.

lovinglearninglife.blogspot.com
  • Current Music
    Nirvana - Smells Like Teen Spirit
*Sunflower

GNOME vs. KDE + operating systems in general

I prefer GNOME. I have always found it to be easier to use, more visually pleasing. It's simple and well-organized – a few essentials are laid out, the rest sequestered in intuitively labeled menus and folders. I don't like KDE – it's too Windows-y, with recursive menus and icons all over the place.

If you think about it, GNOME is kind of Mac-like. But I friggin' hate modern Macs! I think they're too flourishy and obscure what you're trying to do. I hate Windows Vista most of all because it's Windows trying to look like Macintosh and ends up with the worst of both. GNOME isn't like MacOS X or anything like that. GNOME is still clean and simple. It looks like older Macs, around system 7.5.

Could it be that simple? Could it be that I like GNOME simply because it functions like the earliest desktop I learned to use?

Linus Torvalds, I hear, prefers KDE. He says something to the effect that GNOME is too simple, so it doesn't do what he wants to do with it – with, I'm sure, some inflection of superiority in the language. Well, I suppose if you want to do a lot of things with your desktop, that's fine. But I'd rather do things from the command line, and keep my visual space relatively clear.
  • Current Mood
    nerdy
  • Tags
*Sunflower

Trials and tribulations of Linux

So my internet wasn't working on Ubuntu (I have Ubuntu 8.04 and Windows Vista on the same machine) and I knew what I'd been doing when I broke it and I thought I'd reversed everything. Simple measures that had worked before to fix it (recompiling the wireless drivers) didn't work this time. In the spirit of "reverse everything" I decided, even though I didn't think it would make a difference, to uninstall the program I'd been using. I couldn't because I only had the tarball - must have already done it.

So I figured I had an intensive diagnostic mystery on my hands. I started picking apart the bash history and everything. Then I realized it wasn't a tarball at all but a Debian package that didn't need compilation. Whatever, delete it, I'm not going to use it again. And then my internet worked.

The upshot? I'm almost disappointed that it was so easy, because that slashes a significant portion of what I thought I was going to be doing today.
  • Current Mood
    recumbent recumbent
  • Tags
*Sunflower

Uncomfortable truths about myself

I've said in the past that I tend to start thinking people are attractive because I think they're cool as people. This is true, but I've just realized the opposite is also true. On first contact I'm more likely to appreciate someone's personality and forgive their annoying traits if they are physically (either sexually or aesthetically) attractive. Given enough time around any person I will get to know them "for real", but my first-impression judgment of who I want to hang out with more is proving to be very appearance-based and I don't know how cool I am with that. In school, I never noticed because I had the built-in guard of seeing people every day for weeks on end - but now it's all up to me who I see again after first meeting.

I also am ridiculously bad at forming my own opinions on a controversial subject. I am extremely likely to adopt the viewpoint of someone I know well, usually my parents. I'm sure this is an example of some kind of cognitive bias. An issue will be talked about on the radio by experts, but I will see both sides until I ask a friend or family member, "what do you think?" And whatever they say will sound incredibly convincing, and that will be my stance. It's based on... availability? and not logic or ranking of values.
  • Current Mood
    contemplative contemplative